Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First Amendment is not without limitations. Personally, I am of the mind that neo-Nazis and white supremacists are terror groups and the government can limit the speech/assembly of terror groups.
Anyone who says BLM or Antifa are a terror group is an idiot as I don't consider anyone against Nazis a terror group. They're ****ing superheroes as far as I'm concerned and I hope more people join the cause.
So Antifa attacking peaceful protesters in Berkeley is OK? So BLM rioting and torching businesses is OK? Those Berkeley protesters and businesses were not neo-nazis. Unless you're lumping all conservatives in that group?
In spite of your liberal blinders, BLM and Antifa are just as much terrorist organizations as the white supremacists groups. Just because you love one side and hate the other doesn't change that.
Giving out awards? Virtue awards I guess. I ask because it seems that at least for now when you condemn neo Nazis you're not allowed to include anyone else. They are considered so evil that if you say you condemn them and antifa too, you're minimizing just how evil they are. You might even be admitting that you are one of them yourself or at least sympathize with them which is probably a distinction without a difference in the eyes of many.
So I was wondering if there's anyone you can mention in the same sentence with them, of if they are the be all end all, and you must have a separate conversation when discussing other forms of evil because the neo Nazis are in a league all by themselves.
Well, here in the US the neo Nazis do seem to be a stand alone group in terms of being the highest even of evil. At east they are at the moment. Charlottesesville is the first incident involving them in a LONG time. When one thinks about it, this is the first thing that's drawn any coverage since the 80s. The last big deal thing I vol ing Hitler humpers that I can think of was the 16 million armored car heist down in Mendocino county and they got away. The feds caught up with them years later in WA. And they said this was Klan types not goose steppers. There was a difference back then. Turned out they were Nazi types.
And the feds never recovered the money. It was pretty much gone. The hit was well orchestrated. They hit the truck with an RPG or LAW type weapon, popped the doors and grabbed the loot. Since the White power/Aryan:Nazi types have been way underground. Oh they've been around but in small numbers and not getting much attention. Had a scrape with them myself back in 88 at a Metallica concert in Sac. Frigging srawny little punks.
I think people are giving them way to much credit now as to what sort of threat they are. They are made up of some of the most mentally backwards people I can think of. Physically their ranks aren't much better if any. If they were allowed to keep breeding amongst themselves they would be devolved to just about the level of lower primates in a couple more generations. They're getting close now.
And though there was a tragic death in VA this demonstration wasn't that big, considering they drew from across the country coast to coast. Maybe if I'm generous a couple hundred bodies? They were outnumbered by the opposition. 2to 1 at least. And then I see a thread like this. "The pinnacle of evil." Please! These Hitler humping, goose stepping chicken choking morons are being given way to much credibility.
But now since things got escalated there's a bogeyman to use as a rallying cry. And now the Nazi monkeys can do the same. Far better it would be if we had just kept ignoring them. The best acknowledgement of them would have been to acknowledge their obscurity and irrelevance. But somebody just had to toss kerosene on that weak spark left in that fire. Every cause has to have an enemy. Without scapegoats it's hard to get people motivated. I thought it was a good thing to let ideology like naziism just die. Sheesh it was almost there and now it's off of life support and breathing on its own again.
Ain't life grand though. It's all making my head hurt.
Just to clarify on the bold...it's not so much a competition as it is demanding consistency in the beliefs. It's like if there was an anti-rape group, and there were varying opinions on what amount of rape is acceptable...the purists would demand consistency if the others want to call themselves anti-rape.
But yes, a lot of the infighting and drama can get annoying and childish. Anyone doing it to make themselves feel superior is doing it for the wrong reasons.
Many who can get no traction with their party then decide to run as a Libertarian. Yeah, that doesn't go over so well.
First Amendment is not without limitations. Personally, I am of the mind that neo-Nazis and white supremacists are terror groups and the government can limit the speech/assembly of terror groups.
Anyone who says BLM or Antifa are a terror group is an idiot as I don't consider anyone against Nazis a terror group. They're ****ing superheroes as far as I'm concerned and I hope more people join the cause.
That limitation is VERY narrow. So no, the government can't limit the speech of Americans that peacefully protest, no matter how vile their message is. And just because you are "of the mind" means nothing. You don't get to decide that. And last time I checked, the groups that protested are not on any terror group list.
Just to clarify on the bold...it's not so much a competition as it is demanding consistency in the beliefs. It's like if there was an anti-rape group, and there were varying opinions on what amount of rape is acceptable...the purists would demand consistency if the others want to call themselves anti-rape.
But yes, a lot of the infighting and drama can get annoying and childish. Anyone doing it to make themselves feel superior is doing it for the wrong reasons.
Well this is why I may have some libertarian leanings, but I am not one. I will break with the ideology when I feel common sense dictates it(border control is a big example). Then I will be told that means I'm not a true libertarian, to which I say "that's right I'm not".
Communists have killed more, Islamists have as well. Both of those ideologies are just as authoritarian as the neo nazis, and both hate and want to destroy anyone who does not follow their ideology. They do not necessarily hate based on race though. Are either of those two ideological groups worse than the neo nazis? Is there some other group I haven't thought of that is worse than any of these, or are the neo nazis the pinnacle of all that is evil?
Any totalitarian and/or authoritarian flavor of fascism, including Marxism, communism and progressivism is dangerous. Level of danger doesn't matter because the result of any such twisted ideology taking root means people will suffer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
Many who can get no traction with their party then decide to run as a Libertarian. Yeah, that doesn't go over so well.
I'm fine with the Libertarians doing exactly what the progressives are doing to the Democratic party, working from within that is. The Libertarian movement is the fastest growing segment over the last decade, and I believe the wing of the pubs can steer the party back to sanity. If there's still time to do so that is.
Nazis caused the deaths of around 80 million people if you're keeping score.
Not to mention all the white supremacists that made up the colonizing countries of Europe who went around raping and pillaging the rest of the world. Their excuse was everyone else was "savages."
Many who can get no traction with their party then decide to run as a Libertarian. Yeah, that doesn't go over so well.
Nope, and I don't think it should. Tom Woods has talked about that, and how the LP is bringing in non-libertarians who want to sell libertarianism as a mix of left and right - a watered down version to appeal to more people. It's really it's own thing.
Well this is why I may have some libertarian leanings, but I am not one. I will break with the ideology when I feel common sense dictates it(border control is a big example). Then I will be told that means I'm not a true libertarian, to which I say "that's right I'm not".
Fair enough. I definitely prefer that to someone who presents themselves as libertarian when they have no interest in the non-aggression principle or property rights, which I've definitely seen.
Fair enough. I definitely prefer that to someone who presents themselves as libertarian when they have no interest in the non-aggression principle or property rights, which I've definitely seen.
Big discussion here recently on the non aggression thing. Someone new wanting a prominent role in the party that simply could not grasp this idea. (I am NOT a registered L but I do what I can on the state level).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
